Freire discusses the short coming of our current educational system in "The Banking Concept of Education". He describes our current education system as dehumanizing, and that it limits creativity and detaches us from reality. He argues that this won't allow future members of society to help shape or transform reality. He feels that this form of education is oppressive and even likens it to necrophily. He presents his solution to the "Banking" education as the "Problem Posing" education. In this form of education, students are also teachers and teachers are also students and most of the learning and insight is gained through dialogue with the class.
I feel that the "Problem Posing" form of education is a better way to learn as it encourages active participation from the student. However I feel that we still require the "Banking Concept" in order to get anything done with our education. One cannot simply just learn subjects such as mathematics just from talking about it; students need to be able to memorize key facts and able to retrieve them. This also holds true for subjects where discussion is more applicable to some extent. In order to discuss history for instance, a student should know some basic historical facts. So I believe the answer to education lies somewhere in the middle of these two extremes. Part of me feels that the author is being a little over dramatic with the current education system; particularly when he compares it to oppression and necrophily. Also I feel that our development as a human comes from outside of school, instead the people who raised us and the community we lived in help us to learn to interact with the dynamic world.
Your point about the role of education vs. other institutions (family, community) is well put. I also think that you are absolutely correct that certain disciplines call for a classroom practice that may resemble things associated with the "banking" concept of education. I do think that "banking" classroom practices are necessary (or why would I give a lecture?) Furthermore, I'm not sure that "problem-posing" always implies "discussion" classroom practices.
ReplyDeleteFor instance, problem-posing education may take the form of scientific labs and experiments. Think of problem-posing as connoting "creativity" rather than the concrete classroom practices.
What did the greatest thinkers in science and mathematics have in common? They were all incredibly creative (in the wide sense--not just the artsy fartsy sense). What if we taught mathematics as a creative discovery? Are students who can pass standardized calculus exams going to contribute to human knowledge more than Leibniz, who not only was a mathematician responsible for the "integration" model of calculus, but was also a creative philosopher who contemplated metaphysics, god, mathematics, language, politics, ethics, good, and evil?